Climate Policy Update – Fall 2011
For the last several months, implementation of California’s landmark Global Warming Solution Act, broadly known as AB32, was uncertain. AB32 requires broad action within the state to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. After an injunction was issued by the San Francisco County Superior Court in March, the California Air Resources Board has been revising the Scoping Plan and re-evaluating the cap-and-trade portion of the policy. On August 24, the California Air Resources Board voted unanimously to uphold the new and revised scoping plan, which retains a cap-and-trade approach for meeting some of the targets of AB32, and sets the new target date for allocating emission allowances as January 1, 2013. Aside from the cap-and-trade program, other policy tools, such as the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, are retained within the overall strategy to reduce California’s GHG emissions.
At the federal level, despite a hostile environment toward climate policy on Capitol Hill, the Obama administration has been taking measured action towards addressing climate change. This included enforcing the Clean Air Act by implementing new regulations on GHG emissions from power plants and issuing executive orders to increase fuel efficiency in car, light trucks, and, for the first time, in heavy trucks. Unfortunately, however, the trend of increasing attacks on environmental protection and climate science from the Republican congressional leadership and presidential candidates seems to have slowed this progress. On September 2nd, the Obama administration decided to abandon new rules under the Clean Air Act to reduce air pollution from ozone, citing economic instability, and GHG rules for older power plants have already been delayed several months.
On the other hand, a plethora of evidence shows the economic benefit of environmental regulation. For example, according to the Center for American Progress, the implementation of 1997 ozone standards did not result in any negative economic consequences, even though similar arguments were made against regulation at that time. In addition, according to the EPA, implementation of the Clean Air Act to reduce particulates and ozone has saved 160,000 lives in 2010 alone, and the economic benefits will reach $2 trillion by 2020.
More likely, the Obama administration is caving in to baseless attacks by Republican presidential contenders on the EPA and settled climate science. This is unfortunate because the U.S. public has consistently been in favor of regulations that protect the environment, including enforcement of the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. This failure to take concrete action on Climate Change will inevitably reduce investment in green technologies and slow the growing green jobs sector, which are also critical to avoiding disastrous consequences of climate change and kick-starting our economy.
Finally, in the international arena, representatives of the majority of countries are preparing for another international meeting on climate change in Durban. This year is critical for several reasons, not the least of which is the expiration of the Kyoto Protocol in 2012. Developing countries, such as India and China, are likely to agree to reductions in greenhouse gases, with China preparing for implementation of national cap-and-trade policies by 2015. We will continue to watch for developments on the international arena, but major progress seems unlikely in light of the continued resistance by the U.S. Congress to mandatory reductions of GHG emissions.
